From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Robinson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 12, 1970
27 N.Y.2d 864 (N.Y. 1970)

Summary

holding that evidence of match between defendant's blood type and physical evidence must be excluded "in view of the large proportion of the general population having blood of this type"

Summary of this case from Bryant v. Thomas

Opinion

Argued October 13, 1970

Decided November 12, 1970

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, JOSEPH A. MARTINIS, J.

Max Feigin for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Harold Roland Shapiro of counsel), for respondent.


Judgment affirmed. Proof that defendant had type "A" blood and that the semen found in and on the body of decedent was derived from a man with type "A" blood was of no probative value in the case against defendant in view of the large proportion of the general population having blood of this type and, therefore, should not have been admitted. But in view of the careful limitation on its consideration by the jury in the court's instructions and of the fully adequate case made out by other proof against the defendant it was not prejudicial.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

People v. Robinson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 12, 1970
27 N.Y.2d 864 (N.Y. 1970)

holding that evidence of match between defendant's blood type and physical evidence must be excluded "in view of the large proportion of the general population having blood of this type"

Summary of this case from Bryant v. Thomas

finding blood grouping test results "of no probative value" but holding their admission non-prejudicial in light of unspecified limiting instructions and "the fully adequate case made out by other proof against the defendant"

Summary of this case from State v. Gray

In Robinson, supra, the New York high court concluded that evidence of defendant's blood type, introduced in a rape-murder case, was not probative in view of the large portion of the general population having the same blood type.

Summary of this case from State v. Bauer

In People v. Robinson, supra, 317 N.Y.S.2d 19, 19-20, a case involving the matching of semen taken of a murder victim with the defendant's "A" blood type, the court stated that such evidence "was of no probative value in the case against defendant in view of the large proportion of the general population having blood of this type and, therefore, should not have been admitted."

Summary of this case from People v. Lindsey
Case details for

People v. Robinson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES ROBINSON…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 12, 1970

Citations

27 N.Y.2d 864 (N.Y. 1970)
317 N.Y.S.2d 19
265 N.E.2d 543

Citing Cases

People v. White

Accepting the results of the tests for purposes of determining innocence does not involve the same alchemy…

People v. Thorin

See also Anno: Blood grouping tests, 46 ALR2d 1000. New York has adopted the position that such evidence is…